Note from YES! Magazine Publisher Fran Korten: On June 12 the world lost a powerful voice for the value of collective action. Elinor Ostrom, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2009, passed away after months of struggle with pancreatic cancer. Her groundbreaking research documented the conditions under which local people the world over will manage natural resources in an equitable and sustainable manner. Lin was my friend and colleague, and I deeply mourn her loss.

Her perspective is sorely needed now, as delegates gather for the Rio+20 conference in Brazil to negotiate agreements on the best ways to reach a sustainable world. Lin was wary of formulaic solutions that ignore and constrain the capability of local people to act in their own long-term best interest. Government's role, she felt, was to support local capability, not undermine it, as is so often the case.

In the interview that I conducted shortly after she had received the Nobel Prize, I asked her what would be her advice to people in power. "No panaceas!" was her instant response. Large institutions—whether governments or corporations—err in looking for standardized approaches, while local people can tailor their solutions to the unique characteristics of their place. The negotiators at Rio would do well to heed her words.

Elinor Ostrom shared her advice for Rio + 20 with Project Syndicate shortly before her death:

Much is riding on the United
Nations Rio+20 summit. Many are billing it as Plan A for Planet Earth
and want leaders bound to a single international agreement to protect
our life-support system and prevent a global humanitarian crisis. Inaction
in Rio would be disastrous, but a single international agreement would
be a grave mistake. We cannot rely on singular global policies to solve
the problem of managing our common resources: the oceans, atmosphere,
forests, waterways, and rich diversity of life that combine to create
the right conditions for life, including seven billion humans, to
thrive.

We
have never had to deal with problems of the scale facing today’s
globally interconnected society. No one knows for sure what will work,
so it is important to build a system that can evolve and adapt rapidly.

Decades
of research demonstrate that a variety of overlapping policies at city,
subnational, national, and international levels is more likely to
succeed than are single, overarching binding agreements. Such an
evolutionary approach to policy provides essential safety nets should
one or more policies fail.

The
good news is that evolutionary policymaking is already happening
organically. In the absence of effective national and international
legislation to curb greenhouse gases, a growing number of city leaders
are acting to protect their citizens and economies.

This is hardly surprising—indeed, it should be encouraged.

Most
major cities sit on coasts, straddle rivers, or lie on vulnerable
deltas, putting them on the front line of rising sea levels and flooding
in the coming decades. Adaptation is a necessity. But, with cities
responsible for 70 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions, mitigation is
better.

When
it comes to tackling climate change, the United States has produced no
federal mandate explicitly requiring or even promoting
emissions-reductions targets. But, by May last year, some 30 US states
had developed their own climate action plans, and more than 900 US
cities have signed up to the US climate-protection agreement.

Sustainability at local and national levels must add up to global
sustainability. This idea must form the bedrock of national economies
and constitute the fabric of our societies.

This
grassroots diversity in “green policymaking” makes economic sense.
“Sustainable cities” attract the creative, educated people who want to
live in a pollution-free, modern urban environment that suits their
lifestyles. This is where future growth lies. Like upgrading a mobile
phone, when people see the benefits, they will discard old models in a
flash.

Of
course, true sustainability goes further than pollution control. City
planners must look beyond municipal limits and analyze flows of
resources—energy, food, water, and people—into and out of their
cities.

Worldwide,
we are seeing a heterogeneous collection of cities interacting in a way
that could have far-reaching influence on how Earth’s entire
life-support system evolves. These cities are learning from one another,
building on good ideas and jettisoning poorer ones. Los Angeles took
decades to implement pollution controls, but other cities, like Beijing,
converted rapidly when they saw the benefits. In the coming decades, we
may see a global system of interconnected sustainable cities emerging.
If successful, everyone will want to join the club.

Fundamentally,
this is the right approach for managing systemic risk and change in
complex interconnected systems, and for successfully managing common
resources—though it has yet to dent the inexorable rise in global
greenhouse-gas emissions.

Rio+20
has come at a crucial juncture and is undoubtedly important. For 20
years, sustainable development has been viewed as an ideal toward which
to aim. But the first State of the Planet Declaration, published at the
recent mammoth science gathering Planet Under Pressure, made it clear
that sustainability is now a prerequisite for all future development.
Sustainability at local and national levels must add up to global
sustainability. This idea must form the bedrock of national economies
and constitute the fabric of our societies.

Without action, we risk catastrophic and
perhaps irreversible changes to our life-support system.

The
goal now must be to build sustainability into the DNA of our globally
interconnected society. Time is the natural resource in shortest supply,
which is why the Rio summit must galvanize the world. What we need are
universal sustainable development goals on issues such as energy, food
security, sanitation, urban planning, and poverty eradication, while
reducing inequality within the planet’s limits.

As
an approach to dealing with global issues, the UN Millennium
Development Goals have succeeded where other initiatives have failed.
Though not all MDGs will be met by the target date of 2015, we can learn
a great deal from the experience.

Setting
goals can overcome inertia, but everyone must have a stake in
establishing them: countries, states, cities, organizations, companies,
and people everywhere. Success will hinge on developing many overlapping
policies to achieve the goals.

We
have a decade to act before the economic cost of current viable
solutions becomes too high. Without action, we risk catastrophic and
perhaps irreversible changes to our life-support system.

Our
primary goal must be to take planetary responsibility for this risk,
rather than placing in jeopardy the welfare of future generations.

Interested?

Will we turn environmental protection into a game of profit? What you need to know about the global gathering.

How to make our cities just, inclusive, and green.

When companies are owned by workers and the community, everything changes.